Fri. Apr 23rd, 2021

Suraj Kumar Mukhiya vs State on 7 June, 2017

1 min read

1. The above captioned four appeals arise out of a common impugned
judgment of 14th October, 2014, vide which appellants- Sanjay, Suraj,
Ranjeet and Umesh have been found guilty for the offence under Section
395/34 IPC and they have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for
ten years with fine of `10,000/- each with default clause. Trial court has
also held appellant/accused- Ranjeet guilty for the offence under Section
397 IPC and has sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for seven years
but both the sentences awarded to appellant- Ranjeet have been directed
to run concurrently. However, appellant/accused- Ranjeet has been
acquitted for the offence under Section 27 of The Arms Act.
2. Since challenge to the impugned judgment and order on sentence
by counsel for appellants in these four appeals is on similar grounds,
therefore, with the consent of counsel representing both sides, these four
appeals have been heard together and are being decided by this common

Crl.A.1/2015 Page 2 of 6

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply